Constitutional Law Commons^™

Justice Brennan And His Law Clerks, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

From Third Parties To Parents: The Case Of Lesbian Couples And Their Children, Nancy Polikoff

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Education Rights And The New Due Process, Areto A. Imoukuede

Journal Publications

This Article argues for a human dignity-based, due process clause analysis to recognize the fundamental duty of government to provide high quality, public education. Access to public education is a fundamental duty, or positive fundamental right because education is a basic human need and a constituent part of all democratic rights. In The Fifth Freedom, I argued that there is a fundamental duty under the U.S. Constitution to provide public education and that the reason a fundamental right to public education has not been recognized is because of a profound confusion regarding fundamental rights as duties.' The Court is biased …

Presidential Constitutionalism And Civil Rights, Joseph Landau

Faculty Scholarship

As the judicial and legislative branches have taken a more passive approach to civil rights enforcement, the President’s exercise of independent, extrajudicial constitutional judgment has become increasingly important. Modern U.S. presidents have advanced constitutional interpretations on matters of race, gender, HIV-status, self-incrimination, reproductive liberty, and gun rights, and President Obama has been especially active in promoting the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons — most famously by refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Commentators have criticized the President’s refusal to defend DOMA from numerous perspectives but have not considered how the President’s DOMA policy …

Transforming Family Law Through Same-Sex Marriage: Lessons From (And To) The Western World, Macarena Saez

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Same-sex marriage is a 21st century phenomenon. In less than 13 years more than 15 countries have amended their marriage laws to include same-sex couples. Some countries have made the change through political decisions but others have reached the change through adjudicative processes. A comparative analysis of decisions from the highest courts of countries or states granting marriage to same-sex couples demonstrates: 1. similar arguments are presented to these courts when making the case for and against same-sex marriage; 2. courts are using comparative law to justify their decisions on same-sex marriage; 3. the majority of courts in these countries …

Diplomacy And Its Others: The Case Of Comfort Women, Monica E. Eppinger, Karen Knop, Annelise Riles

All Faculty Scholarship

The “Comfort Women incident,” now at least several decades old, troubles the familiar view of law as a funnel for politics. Viewed as a funnel, the wide range of legal, political, cultural, and diplomatic efforts to seek or resist redress for the system of sexual slavery institutionalized by the Japanese military during the Second World War would be assessed as ultimately pushing in the same direction: toward vindicating human rights. We see in the Comfort Women incident a far more chaotic interaction of law and politics. As critical legal feminist, we are concerned with finding a truthful and ethical way …

More Is More: Strengthening Free Exercise, Speech, And Association, John D. Inazu

Scholarship@WashULaw

Prominent scholars have suggested that one important means of strengthening the First Amendment is by limiting its protections to “core” interests. Philip Hamburger has asserted the argument most forcefully. His generalized worry is that expanding the coverage of First Amendment rights can shift absolute protection of a defined core to contingent “balancing” for all claims asserted under those rights. In Hamburger’s words, “more is less.” We can think of cautions like these as arguments for rights confinement. On this view, legal doctrine will be most resilient to cultural pressures when it is construed narrowly. But the interplay between doctrine and …

The Conflict Of Visions In Nfib V. Sebelius, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

In 2010, few anticipated the fate of healthcare reform would rest with the Supreme Court. Yet National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius [hereinafter NFIB] emerged as a watershed case that could remake the constitutional landscape. NFIB presented a conflict between two constitutional visions of federal power and the role of the courts in policing such limits--an unconstrained vision, under which limits on federal power are enforced primarily through the political process, and a constrained vision, under which constitutional limits on federal power are enforced by the courts. The contrasting views of the constitutionality of the individual mandate and …

The Slow Evolution Of Second Amendment Law, Joan H. Miller

Seattle University Law Review Online

Shortly after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting left twenty children and six adults dead, a public movement ensued. The movement demanded that gun violence be addressed as a public health issue. While the movement led to successful gun control reform in a few states, it was unable to gain any traction in the federal government and had the opposite effect in others states where firearms became easier to own, carry, and conceal. Joan Miller provides an update on changes in the Second Amendment law that have occurred since her Article, The Second Amendment Goes to College, was published in …

On Candor, Free Enterprise Fund, And The Theory Of The Unitary Executive, Michael J. Gerhardt

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Calming Unsettled Waters: A Proposal For Navigating The Tenuous Power Divide Between The Federal Courts And The Uspto Under The American Invents Act, William Rose

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Reproductive Injustice In The New Millennium, Sybil Shainwald

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

A reexamination of the history of abortion law in the United States is essential to an understanding of recent changes. Part I of this Article will provide a synopsis of the early Anglo-American view of abortion at common law, the early anti-abortion statutes, and the state of abortion during the early twentieth century. Part II will discuss the liberalization of abortion laws, as well as the ways in which the law pertaining to a woman’s right to choose has evolved since 1973. Finally, Part III will analyze the constitutionality of the current wave of restrictions.

The Resilience Of Property, Lynda L. Butler

Faculty Publications

Resilience is essential to the ability of property to face transforming social and environmental change. For centuries, property has responded to such change through a dialectical process that identifies emerging disciplinary perspectives and debates conflicting values and norms. This dialectic promotes the resilience of property, allowing it to adapt to changing conditions and needs. Today the mainstream economic theory dominating common law property is progressively being intertwined with constitutionally protected property, undermining its long-term resilience. The coupling of the economic vision of ordinary property with constitutional property embeds the assumptions, choices, and values of the economic theory into both realms …

The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter

Seattle University Law Review

By filing a petition for a federal writ of habeas corpus, a prisoner initiates a legal proceeding collateral to the direct appeals process. Federal statutes set forth the procedure and parameters of habeas corpus review. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) first signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, included significant cut-backs in the availability of federal writs of habeas corpus. This was by congressional design. Yet, despite the dire predictions, for most of the first decade of AEDPA’s reign, the door to habeas relief remained open. More recently, however, the Supreme Court reinterpreted a key portion …

Some Thoughts On Sanford Levinson’S “Divided Loyalties: The Problem Of 'Dual Sovereignty' And Constitutional Faith”, David Novak

Touro Law Review

Analyzes the two divided loyalties that Levinson faces in "Divided Loyalties: The Problem of 'Dual Sovereignty' and Constitutional Faith."

Israel's Constitutional Tragedy, Menachem Lorberbaum

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dual Sovereignty In Traditional Judaism And Liberal Democracy, William Galston

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Divided Loyalties: The Problem Of “Dual Sovereignty” And Constitutional Faith, Sanford Levinson

Touro Law Review

Sanford Levinson provides the inaugural lecture of the new Jewish Law Institute at Touro Law School. He focuses on some of the ways that he finds himself constantly thinking of what might be termed "meta-issues" that arise in his joint study of, and intellectual confrontation with, Jewish law and American constitutional law.

The Non-Redelegation Doctrine, F. Andrew Hesisck, Carissa Byrne Hessick

William & Mary Law Review

In United States v. Booker, the Court remedied a constitutional defect in the federal sentencing scheme by rendering advisory the then-binding sentencing guidelines promulgated by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. One important but overlooked consequence of this decision is that it redelegated the power to set sentencing policy from the Sentencing Commission to federal judges. District courts now may sentence based on their own policy views instead of being bound by the policy determinations rendered by the Commission.

This Article argues that, when faced with a decision that implicates an unambiguous delegation, the courts should not redelegate unless authorized by Congress …

Statutory Interpretation As Constestatory Democracy, Glen Staszewski

William & Mary Law Review

This Article provides a novel solution to the countermajoritarian difficulty in statutory interpretation by applying recent insights from civic republican theory to the adjudication of statutory disputes in the modern regulatory state. From a republican perspective, freedom consists of the absence of the potential for arbitrary domination, and democracy should therefore include both electoral and contestatory dimensions. The Article argues that statutory interpretation in the modern regulatory state is best understood as a mechanism of contestatory democracy. It develops this conception of statutory interpretation by considering the distinct roles of legislatures, administrative agencies, and courts in making and implementing the …

The Federal Medical Loss Ratio: A Permissible Federal Regulation Or An Encroachment On State Power?, Meghan S. Stubblebine

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The New Facially Neutral “Anti-Shariah” Bills: A Constitutional Analysis, Amara S. Chaudhry-Kravitz

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Dog Days Of Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

The Definite Article: The D.C. Circuit's Redefinition Of Recess Appointments, Jeff Vandam

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

The Normative & Historical Cases For Proportional Deportation, Angela M. Banks

Faculty Publications

Is citizenship status a legitimate basis for allocating rights in the United States?

In immigration law the right to remain in the United States is significantly tied to citizenship status. Citizens have an absolutely secure right to remain in the United States regardless of their actions. Noncitizens’ right to remain is less secure because they can be deported if convicted of specific criminal offenses. This Article contends that citizenship is not a legitimate basis for allocating the right to remain. This Article offers normative and historical arguments for a right to remain for noncitizens. This right should be granted to …

Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens

Seattle University Law Review

This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …

Chief Justice Roberts's Individual Mandate: The Lawless Medicine Of Nfib V. Sebelius, Gregory P. Magarian

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

The Likely Impact Of National Federation On Commerce Clause Jurisprudence, Robert J. Pushaw Jr., Grant S. Nelson

Pepperdine Law Review

In National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court exhaustively analyzed Congress’s constitutional power to enact the watershed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA or “Obamacare”). The ACA imposes a “shared responsibility requirement,” popularly known as the “Individual Mandate” (IM), which forces Americans to buy medical insurance or pay a “penalty.” The ACA’s text and legislative history, as well as the public defenses of it by President Obama and his supporters, consistently described the IM as a valid exercise of Congress’s power “[t]o regulate Commerce . . . among the several States.” This reliance on the Commerce …

Property's Constitution, James Y. Stern

Faculty Publications

Long-standing disagreements over the definition of property as a matter of legal theory present a special problem in constitutional law. The Due Process and Takings Clauses establish individual rights that can be asserted only if “property” is at stake. Yet the leading cases interpreting constitutional property doctrines have never managed to articulate a coherent general view of property, and in some instances have reached opposite conclusions about its meaning. Most notably, government benefits provided in the form of individual legal entitlements are considered “property” for purposes of due process but not takings doctrines, a conflict the cases acknowledge but do …

Watch Your Step: Recovery For Inmate Slip And Fall - Rodriguez V. City Of New York, Brittany A. Fiorenza

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.